[moved]Do Newer Liteon Drives Still Need to Scan at 4X?

I have no opinion, I just have noticed quite a few results like those below and thought I would get some feedback.

The scans are all the same disc and the same drive. The first is at 1X, then 4X, and lastly 12X. I tested 16X and that has problems when the speed exceeds 12X so i would agree that 16X is out.

Just FYI: the Lite-On 5S drives (1635S and Sony Q30A) use 8x scan speed as the forum standard. http://club.cdfreaks.com/showpost.php?p=1212664&postcount=14

Given that it was just 5 days ago, I feel pretty good that I came to the same conclusion as the experts. Thanks for the link.

Maybe my post will inform a few others who missed the change and we can petition to have the 1693 included as well.

Just looking at the scans, it would seem to me that 4x still gave the more accurate results out of the selected speeds.

Two scans of the same disc here. First at 8x the second at 4x. To be honest I don’t know which is more reliable - one that shows more errors or less?



Reliability is repeated measurement that consistently produces
the same results. Both scans have the same pattern of error read and, most importantly, the PIF totals are virtually the same.

If 8X produces repeated accuracy, I would say go for it. Errors are relative and 8X scans compared to 8X scans looks like a viable way to save a little time.

I don’t have a LiteOn drive, but strictly based on the PIF totals, there’s little distinction. Personally, if I did have a LiteOn drive, I would use the 4x speed as my indicator, as that’s been the standard for so long, just like 2x for the Plextor 716a (and I tested between two settings extensively–“high accuracy” and “good accuracy” under Plextools and found “good accuracy” was so close to the results under “high accuracy,” but cut the time for scanning in half, that the “good accuracy” could be used for pretty conclusive scanning results) has been the standard considered most accurate. However, that said, if you run 4x and 8x scans, and keep finding the PIF totals just as close as this one, the 8x should be fine. I would think, though, that a certain ‘difference’ should be accepted before LiteOns are used to scan at 8x instead of 4x; it would convince me to use 8x if many users would show 4x and 8x scans, then see what the average PIF total difference is; if it’s no more than +/- 15-20 total PIF, I’d say the 8x would be fine. In the end, the scan is just an indication of burn quality, and if your scanning speed does give you consistently good results as another speed, I would see no problem using the faster speed.